EU Referendum

Showing posts with label Turkey. Show all posts

Cartoons[i-Cartoons]... President Obama backing Turkey's membership of the EU will be seen as unwonted interference in European affairs. After all, whenever President Bush made statements of that kind, there was outrage in the land.

Then again, there seems to be no outrage or sneering contempt at the fact that the self-same ultra-brilliant President Obama thinks that they speak Austrian in Austria. Somebody should tell the highly internationally minded statesman that the language they speak in that country is German. [You have to scroll right down to the last question but one since most of the questions at the top were from American rather than European journalists.]

Fausta reports that there are likely to be some bad feeling in the Czech Republic though, presumably, President Klaus will not be given an iPod with President Obama's speeches.

We shall have more of what has come out of the NATO Summit and the various negotiations behind the scenes. For the moment let us just report that Turkey has dropped her objection to the Danish Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen, who will be the next Secretary-General of NATO. (In Denmark he will be succeeded in the prime ministerial position by the Finance Minister, Loekke Rasmussen. Makes it relatively easy for bloggers to have prime ministers of the same surname succeeding each other.)

According to the BBC in language that reminds one of teenage girls talking about pop stars, it was the "charm and intervention of President Obama" that secured Turkey's approval. However, there are persistent rumours that the first thing the new SecGen of NATO will have to apologize for those cartoons in Istanbul. The BBC story hints at it without specifying whether it was President Obama who insisted on it. There is more on that on Hot Air.

This will really help the anti-Islamist cause whether in the West or in Turkey itself. And to think that we used to think Anders Fogh Rasmussen to be one of the few honourable leaders in Western Europe.

UPDATE: Michelle Malkin who is, understandably, unhappy at the idea of an apology for those cartoons, links to the Reuters story that quotes Former Prime Minister and NATO SecGen elect Rasmussen "falling short of the full apology expected by Turkey".

Actually, the story hints that the row over the cartoons was just the cover and the real meat of the argument was Turkey wanting to extract one or two other promises from President Obama.

The row over his appointment, which threatened the image of unity at NATO's 60th anniversary summit, was resolved after Obama guaranteed Turkish commanders would be present at the alliance's command and that one of Rasmussen's deputies would be a Turk.

There has always been a very practical side to Turkish politicians. One can but applaud.

Rice_Zebari[i-Rice_Zebari]Yesterday’s Spiegel, reporting on the Turkish attack on what they call PKK targets in Iraqi Kurdistan (or the Kurdish part of Iraq, depending on where you are standing), was a little snooty.

The attack came a day before the next lot of those never-ending negotiations with the European Union, which, as Spiegel clearly thinks, ought to be pre-eminent in Turkish political mentality.

Ankara may be upping the ante in its efforts to tackle Kurdish separatists across the border in Iraq, but its timing leaves something to be desired. A cross-border incursion by Turkish troops on Tuesday morning came just before US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice landed for a surprise visit in the northern Iraqi city of Kirkuk, just south of the Kurdish region. And it came on the eve of Turkey entering a further round of talks with the European Union on Wednesday.

Then again, one could argue that the timing was carefully chosen to coincide with these events. As we have pointed out before, allowing the PKK to establish itself in Iraq (or Iraqi Kurdistan) and to launch cross-border attacks on Turkey and not to expect the latter to do something about it was the height of folly. The one thing the army, the secularist parties and the Islamist AK are united on is that the PKK has to be dealt with. I expect the Kurdish parties disagree but they are not much consulted on this issue.

This was the first cross-border incursion by Turkey and followed Sunday’s air attack that had killed one woman and was condemned by both the Kurdish regional government and the Iraqi Prime Minister.

The Iraqi Kurdish regional government condemned the raid. "Turkey wants to ransfer the problem onto the territory of Iraqi Kurdistan," Fuad Hussein, head of Kurdish President Massoud Barzani's office, told Reuters.

The Iraqi government in Baghdad had already condemned Sunday's air strikes which killed one civilian woman. Baghdad said Ankara should coordinate any future military action with them.

As it happens, the two bodies do not always see eye to eye, as the issue of Kirkuk, the city visited by Secretary of State Rice yesterday demonstrates.

By late afternoon, as Deutsche Welle reported, the Turkish troops started withdrawing and it is not clear whether there were any casualties. This does not sound like a serious attack, more in the nature of a warning shot and it defies reason to assume that the Turkish authorities, political and military had not planned it very carefully.

Nor does it seem likely that the planned attack was unknown in Washington DC. It is now fairly widely known that after President Bush’s meeting with Prime Minister Erdogan the United States have shared information with Turkey about the precise position of some of those PKK camps.

Turkey+rally.01[i-Turkey+rally.01]The questions are, as usual, who knew and when did they know. Was Secretary of State Rice briefed? Did the Turks know about the surprise visit before they decided to send a few commandos over the border?

The Kurdish authorities are convinced that the Americans were aware of the two attacks and agreed to turn a blind eye. The head of the Kurdish regional government, who had previously threatened Turkey with an almighty war if they as much as flew over the supposed PKK camps, refused to meet Condi Rice.

While the United States does not want trouble in northern Iraq (or Iraqi Kurdistan), which is the most secure part of the country at present, the idea that the PKK will keep it that way is not entirely plausible.

After meeting Iraqi officials in Baghdad, Ms Rice said the US, Turkey and Iraq shared a common interest "in stopping the activities of the PKK".

She argued that the separatist rebel group threatened to undo the progress that has been made in northern Iraq.

The Iraqi government sort of agrees and announces itself to be disturbed by the presence of the PKK while it also worries about possible threats to civilians though acknowledging that all the Turkish attacks were on sparsely populated areas. In any case the Iraqi government has little say in what happens in the Kurdish areas.

OK, so what about the EU and the negotiations about Turkey’s putative membership, already opposed by France vociferously and Germany with others, somewhat more quietly?

Spiegel has no doubts on the subject. Turkey is going to be punished by the EU. Or, at least, disapproved of:

The timing of the Turkish aggression may be unfortunate for Ankara's hopes of eventual membership of the European Union, which is already resisted by some EU countries, in particular France. Turkish officials are meeting with EU counterparts on Wednesday to formally start negotiations on two of 35 areas where the country needs to apply European law before it can start the accession process.

Brussels has voiced concern over the country's military adventures in northern Iraq. On Monday, in response to the air raids at the weekend, the Portuguese EU presidency urged Turkey to "exercise restraint, to respect the territorial integrity of Iraq and refrain from taking any military action that could undermine regional peace and stability."

The Turks might point out with some justification that PKK attacks into Turkish territory and the killing of Turkish soldiers does not do a great deal for regional peace and stability, whereas the EU’s threats to sort out Chad or the presence of French troops in the Ivory Coast do not exactly concern matters of life and death for the Europeans.

As it happens, there are ever more noises from Turkey that indicate certain weariness with the EU and its games. As we have reported, for instance here, ever more Turkish voices are sounding doubtful about the need for the country to join up to an organization they might not like. Naturally enough, this is not official policy but the noises are becoming ever more loud.

In a recent article in the Wall Street Journal [available to subscribers only in full], Sinan Ülgen, a leading Turkish economist, wrote that the EU has failed in every attempt to impose its foreign policy ideas.

In an elaborate ceremony on Thursday in the Portuguese capital, European Union leaders signed the Lisbon Treaty that, among other institutional changes, creates a powerful foreign policy czar. Or so eurskeptics complain. But despite their fears that this "high representative" will erode national sovereignty, the EU looks destined to remain a dwarf in the international arena. As long as foreign affairs are subject to unanimity voting, even the most parochial national interests will override the search for consensus.

His argument is that, no matter what happens, the EU’s common foreign policy is hijacked by one of the bigger member states, usually France or Germany. His examples are Kosovo, a mess if ever there was one; Chad, of which we have written too many times on this blog, to link; Darfur, ditto. The EU has not even been able to work out some kind of an energy policy that all member states would agree, did not rely excessively on Russia and involved any of the Caucasian former Soviet states.

Furthermore, Mr Ülgen explains, Turkey is not particularly interested in what the EU demands from it, since it seems unable to come to any useful conclusion on matters pertaining to the Kurdish problem or anything else that might interest the Turks. In the circumstances, why should Turkey introduce reforms that the EU desires, unless they happen to be reforms Turkey wants.

Interestingly, Mr Ülgen explains that this does not mean Turkey is turning away from the West as recent events have proved that its relationship with the United States is closer than ever.

As it happens, my colleague has written about this already in connection with the toys (what else?) Turkey is buying here and here.

Despite all this, negotiations have started in six other areas between EU and Turkey:

Negotiations started today over aligning Turkey's regulations with the EU in the areas of consumer protection and transport and energy networks. Turkey has now started talks in six of the bloc's 35 policy areas and completed one.

For once, it is not only the EU that is playing hard to get. What happens if the Turks tell Sarkozy that if he wants them in his Mediterranean union then he must have them in the European Union as well?

link[i-link]The EU has criticized Turkey for still keeping a law, which makes it a crime to insult Turkishness and Turkish identity. In practical terms what this legislation has meant is a virtual ban on any discussion of those Armenian massacres of 1915, a subject on which there is much heat generated in many places and on both sides, but so far, little light.

The Turkish government’s response was that it has a ready proposal that it will bring to parliament very soon, that will amend the infamous Article 301 of the penal code, under which writers, journalists and historians can be tried for “insulting Turkishness”.

The immediate point is that this is Turkey once again trying very hard – if the law is really amended – to be European and, perhaps, a worthy member of the European Union, the former becoming more important to many in that country than the latter.

There is, however, another aspect that one should take into account. If Article 301 is amended, will the Turks not be required to call the events of 1915 genocide? As we have pointed out before, French legislation that would force everyone to do just that (there’s freedom of speech for you) has been quietly shelved and the Congress Resolution, which has come to nothing, was a non-binding one.

Is this, in another words, the necessary compromise? We shall see.

Meanwhile, there are other developments. Turkey has confirmed the arrest of an Al-Quaeda suspect wanted in Germany on suspicion of being involved in plans to attack American targets there. Undoubtedly, Turkey will start reminding EU member states of its readiness to co-operate when the time comes for wanting PKK terrorists.

As far as dealing with PKK goes, Turkish President Abdullah Gül has announced that decisions have been taken but these are not being revealed at them moment though the talk is still of the need to co-operate with the Iraqi government and, in particular, the American military and political authorities.

Prime Minister Erdogan has met President Bush to discuss the situation and it would appear that they agreed to share intelligence on the subject. It is not clear what kind of support Bush has offered and whether the Americans will accept the idea of Turkey trying to solve the problem herself.

At present the Turkish army and the Turkish government are in agreement that something has to be done to stop raids across the border but that something is unlikely to be full-scale invasion. They are still relying on the Americans to put pressure on the Kurdish government to hand the PKK leaders over or to clear out the organization. The general feeling is that probably an assurance of some kind was given during the meeting.

COMMENT THREAD

Words have been exchanged on EUReferendum (not on the forum – those do not count as WORDS) and I can report that the Great Leader is displeased with his humble acolyte (that’s me) probably because she is not ‘umble enough.

Nevertheless, said not very ‘umble acolyte insists on posting about the big wide world out there, which, oddly enough, continues to exist and have its own problems while we all wring our hands and have hysterics about the (Constitutional) (Reform) Lisbon Treaty, just as we did after all the previous treaties. Been there, done that, unlike, I suspect, a very large number of our forum members.

How many, I wonder, of all those people who are having the vapours now sat through the Maastricht debates in Parliament or campaigned actively for a referendum on that rather ghastly treaty?

Anyway, that was not what convinced the Great Leader to let his not so ‘umble acolyte to write what she thinks is of some interest but a threat to have hysterics of her own. Nobody wants that, I am sure.

So, the big bad world. Firstly, ladies and gentlemen, we have Turkey, a country of some importance to Britain, those who fight against terror and the EU. Two problems have agitated that country and its allies: Kurds and Armenians.The two problems are very different as I shall try to analyze in this posting but there is are certain vague parallels. Both groups appear to be eternal victims of their various neighbours.

The rest of this very long posting is on Umbrella 3 but I must warn our readers that it is long. And it is not about the Treaty.

istanbul_01[i-istanbul_01]Yes, yes, I expect most of our readers have assumed that I have finally retreated and allowed the North world domination to take place. Not so but far from it.

I am merely investigating for my own benefit whether Turkey is likely to suffer the fate that has befallen many of us, that is membership of the European Union. I must admit, this does not appear to be much of an issue in Istanbul but I may simply be missing out something.

However, there are obviously some things one cannot help noticing in Istanbul, once known as Constantinople (given the number of Russians there are here, I wonder whether they have taken it, after all) and before that as Byzantium.

There is no question about the city being that exciting thing, the capital of an empire if only in the past. No city ever lives that down. If you don't believe me, spend some time wandering round Rome.

But Istanbul is the most astonishing mixture of pomp and splendour and dilapidated squalor. It reminds me quite uncannily of Eastern Europe of some decades ago. In fact, some East European cities are still similar but the one I knew best is nowadays in fine fettle. Istanbul may get there, too.

What can I say that might interest our readers? There are far fewer veiled ladies here than in Shepherds Bush, though even there the numbers are going down. But Turkish ladies of varying ages do tend to wear very lovely bright headscarves, far prettier than the headscarves as worn by Mrs Mop of the forties and fifties. Many of them are very very chic and I am trying to work out how they achieve that effect.

I have hopes as several people have spoken to me in Turkish. Clearly I do not look that different.

The biggest surprise are the street cats and dogs - all in excellent condition, well fed, well looked after but clearly of no particular address. A couple of cats wandered inside the Haghia Sophia, playing with visitors, posing for photographs and generally adding to the atmosphere.

The Blue Mosque is beautiful but the New Mosque (1572) is much finer. And yes, there is a photograph of me in a headscarf inside the Blue Mosque, which shall be posted as soon as I am back in London to annoy numerous readers. Heh!

The food is excellent, the people are friendly, the Bosphorus is spectacular, hardly anyone reads newspapers and the only time people seemed to watching TV was when Turkey played Moldova at football. And there are no pictures of the following: Princess Di, Victoria Beckham, the McCanns or the Macartneys. The many pictures of Mustafa Kemal is a small price to pay for that relief.

I wonder if anybody here needs an advisor on EU affairs.

turkey_scarf_0920[i-turkey_scarf_0920] It is good to know that there are open debates about constitutional changes somewhere almost in Europe. Of course, the debates are in Turkey, a country that is unlikely ever to become part of the European Union, which is probably just as well. They might be shocked by the way matters are swept under the carpet here.

Chinaview reports that the AKP working group that has been discussing a reform to the constitution, which is not the original one set up by Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, but one that was brought in during a military coup in 1980, has failed to reach agreement on a number of issues.

The lawmakers and academicians of the AKP working group have agreed on maintaining the first articles of existing constitution covering the form of the state and characteristics of the republic, integrity of the state, official language, flag, national anthem, and capital as well as irrevocable provisions.

But they failed to reach a consensus on a formula, showing disputes for the amendment of the constitution, with the headscarf issue became the main obstacle, according to media reports.

In fact, both formulations abolish the ban on headscarves in higher education but there is an interesting difference in the wording.

The first formula holds that nobody can be banned from her right to high education due to her dress, while the second one says there will be no dress code in the universities.

According to the current dress code, headscarf is not allowed in state offices and universities.

In this light, AKP prominent names are searching for a formula which will open the doors of universities to students wearing headscarf, while preventing robe, turban and black chuddar with the new constitution.

The Prime Minister insists that the constitution will not be reformed without extensive debates in the parliament, where the AKP has a majority. With an AKP President, the chances of the new constitutional provisions being stopped are slim.

Worries are already being expressed, as Al-Jazeera reports:

University rectors and the head of Turkey's court of appeals both warned on Wednesday against any change in this regulation.

The head of Turkey's Higher Education Board - a well-known secularist law scholar - condemned Erdogan's move to lift the headscarf ban.

Erdogan Tezic said: "It is our mission to remind the public that any constitutional regulation that would abolish restrictions on clothing is illegal."

Ayse Ayata, a professor at Ankara's Middle East Technical University, said: "The lifting of the ban could lead to increased community pressure on uncovered women to cover up."

Arguments are being made that the new constitution will give the government and parliament too much power and upset the balance between institutions. Furthermore, the main opposition party is unhappy “that the government inform the EU about constitutional amendment before it is discussed at home in Turkey”. [sic] Well, they had better get used to it.

COMMENT THREAD

Gul_president[i-Gul_president]It is a little hard to understand some of the kerfuffle around the election of Abdullah Gül as Turkey’s new president. One can quite understand the Turks being a little wary and the army casually mentioning that they do have a role in the Turkish constitution as its guardian and promoter. In fact, military commanders were absent from the swearing in of the President.

In the first place I find it hard to understand why there were no candidates apart from Gül. In the circumstances everybody knew that he would not go through on the first two rounds because his party did not have the required majority but would do so on the third round.

According to Al-Jazeera, Gül’s wife, she of the elegant silk headscarf, also stayed away, leaving us all with the question of how exactly they are going to resolve the problem of women not being allowed to wear headscarves in public buildings in Turkey. Will the new President and his wife pretend that it is merely a fashion statement?

Gül is being described variously as “the first former Islamist to win the post in Turkey's modern history” and as a “a devout Muslim with a background in political Islam”. While it is not impossible to be both there do seem to be certain difficulties in the way.

Then again, President Gül’s first statement made it clear that he does not intend to undermine the Turkish constitution or its secular state. Zaman reports that in an essay just before the fully predicted election

Gül also gave two basic goals for Turkey's foreign policy vision: "The first target is to become an integral part of the European Union. Full membership to the EU does not set an alternative to Turkey's powerful transatlantic bonds and its strategic ties with the US. The second target is to create an environment of security, stability, welfare, friendship and cooperation in the areas surrounding the country, located as it is in the natural center of the Balkans, the Caucasus, the Black Sea, the Middle East, Central Asia, and Europe, which all have an important place in Turkey's foreign policy."

Whether the first of those is feasible or not remains to be seen. President Sarkozy, for one, intends to make sure that every difficulty is piled in Turkey’s way. Nor is it entirely clear whether it is possible to be an integral part of the European Union (is that the same as being a Member State or are the Turks playing a little game here) and keep those powerful transatlantic ties, though the East European countries seem to be doing all right on that.

The second goal can be described as motherhood and apple-pie stuff but it is interesting that the new President is using language that is a far cry from what one would expect from an Islamist, even a former Islamist.

It is no secret to those few who read my postings on this blog that I do tend to root for Turkey, partly because I find the country and its history fascinating and partly because it is a deliberately secular Muslim country. It is not the only one with a more or less democratic constitution – Jordan is one and both Malaysia and Indonesia are close – but it is the one that may show the way forward for other countries, such as Iraq.

If a religious Muslim can be the President of a secularist Islamic country without upsetting that balance, it will be a big step for all of us towards some sort of a settlement across the former Ottoman Empire.

Then again, the fears of the secularists are not surprising and the army might still play the Joker.

Meanwhile, President Sarkozy, Rambo in the Elysée, as Spiegel describes him, has been musing on his 100 days (a little more successful than Napoleon’s were) though he does seem to spend a good deal of time on holiday, as the dissident frogman points out.

He has been coy about Turkish membership, which may have repercussions in Turkey but then, if he welcomed it, there would have been repercussions in France, the last thing Sarko wants as he pretends that the French vote against the European Constitution was of no significance.

In the speech, he also called on the European Union to adopt a more unified and bolder security strategy. He suggested that he might support Germany's bid to be secure a seat on the United Nations Security Council. He also chided Russia for using a "certain brutality" in its political use of energy supplies, and he urged the international community to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear arms.

According to Deutsche Welle, as reported by Focus Information Agency, “Sarkozy said Japan, India and Brazil should also be granted permanent seats”. Quite right, too. The more countries have permanent seats the less that pesky Security Council will be able to decide on anything. And the more difficult it will be for the likes of Lord Malloch-Brown to advocate a seat for the European Union.

COMMENT THREAD

Abdullah+Gul.02[i-Abdullah+Gul.02]The AK Party, having won a decisive victory in the Turkish parliamentary election last month, has once again nominated Abdullah Gül as its candidate for the presidency.

Last time round this caused difficulties with the secularist parties and the army. The parliamentary parties refused to participate in the presidential vote, thus causing something of a crisis, which led to the parliamentary election. At present the secularist groups are merely muttering threats and Mr Gül is due to meet them to allay their fears, which revolve round his strongly Islamic outlook and his wife wearing a headscarf. (Actually, she seems to wear rather elegant Parisian headscarves so she may not want to give them up even to promote her husband's career.)

The first round of the presidential election is due on the 20th. In the first and second round a two-thirds majority is required. The AK Party does not have enough members of parliament to achieve that so the process may well go to the third round when a simple majority will be needed.

Turkish_parliament[i-Turkish_parliament]The new Turkish Parliament has been sworn in and there are many uncertainties. The AK Party that leans towards Islam has a comfortable majority and that has caused some worries.

The Prime Minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, proclaimed immediately after the election that his party was determined to preserve Turkey's secular values.

This was repeated at the opening of the Parliament:

The oldest member of parliament, Sukru Elekdag, of the secular People's Republican Party, was given the traditional honor of chairing the opening session. In his address to the newly elected deputies, he appealed for unity by directly quoting the words of Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the leader of the ruling Justice and Development party. He said "We have common values and goals that unite us." quoting a statement by the prime minister after his party's recent victory. He continued with the rest of Mr. Erdogan's remark: "We will improve our republic which is a democratic, secular, social state of law, and we will never make concessions on these values."

The question of the President remains outstanding and a constitutional referendum has been promised for October 22, which may well decide that there should be direct presidential elections in the country in future.

Ayla_Akat_Ata[i-Ayla_Akat_Ata]In the meantime a great deal of attention is focused on the 21 Kurdish MPs, all but one of whom are members of the Kurdish Democratic Society Party that has been accused of having links with the PKK, which is on European and American lists of terrorist groups. Aylat Akat Ata is one of the Kurdish MPs.

The Kurdish MPs were banned from the Turkish Parliament in 1994 because of the alleged links with the PKK and their return is seen as a hopeful sign that some solution will be found to the Kurdish problem. Over the last few years the Turkish government has made several concessions to the Kurds, allowing them to use their language and to be educated in it.

Unfortunately, other news from the Kurdish region is not good. Eight people have been kidnapped by the PKK a couple of days ago. Three soldiers have been killed and one wounded by a roadside bomb blast also set up by the PKK.

The Turkish army has said repeatedly that terrorist groups were organized and terrorist activity was planned in Iraqi Kurdistan, threatening to invade the area to deal with the PKK and its supporters.

With the PKK indulging in terrorist activities the government and the army are unlikely to indulge in an open rift.

COMMENT THREAD

Turkey+GE[i-Turkey+GE]As expected, the ruling Justice and Development (AK) Party has won a very comfortable majority in the Turkish elections, having "won at least 341 seats in the 550-member parliament, with over 46 per cent of the vote". This will presumably mean that they will be able to form a government without resorting to a coalition. Erdogan had said he would resign if that happened.

Two other, secularist parties also crossed the 10 per cent threshold to enter parliament.

The Republican People's Party (CHP) won about 20.7 per cent and the National Movement Party (MHP) took about 14.4 per cent.

No other party passed the threshold, though over 20 independent Kurdish candidates also won seats.

Erdogan has vowed to continue the reforms needed to join the European Union and the negotiations, though it is now well known that most of Turkey is cooling to EU membership.

More importantly for Turkey's future, he said:

We will support and protect what our nation has entrusted us with. We will work to undertake the duty you have given us.

We will never compromise the basic principles of our republic. These principles are needed for a strong and wealthy Turkey.

Adding that AK continued to believe in plurality of political voices (something that Kemalists do not often accept) and free market reforms.

We shall have to see how things develop. Turkey is facing a few problems, not least the renewal of fighting in the Kurdish parts. Erdogan will not be able to deal with that without the army, who views him with some suspicion.

COMMENT THREAD

Turkey+rally.01[i-Turkey+rally.01]EUObserver reports on the basis of an interview in FT Deutschland that the Enlargement Commissar, Olli Rehn, has warned France that there could be no general debate about Turkey’s possible entry into the European Union.

President Sarkozy, well aware of French public opinion on the matter as well as of the new constitutional provision for a referendum, possibly hopes that if he remains intransigent on this issue, the people of France might ignore the fact that he is trying not to have a referendum on the treaty that is due to come out of the IGC.

To be fair, it is not entirely clear what Sarko envisages when he says that he wants a general debate in the EU about its final borders before December. A general debate between whom, exactly?

The idea is obviously not very popular with the powers that be, debates not being occasions they are particularly fond of. So Commissar Rehn waffled about the accession process being “an anchor for democracy and secularism”, whatever that might mean, and also about Turkey being the transit land for 15 per cent of the EU’s oil and gas.

The last point is yet another attempt to conflate economic agreements with membership of the EU. Turkey can stay outside the European project and still continue to supply any amount of oil and gas. The two do not depend on each other.

The real worry for the Commission is that Turkey may decide that it does not want to join an organization that is so anxious not to have her. (Actually, Groucho Marx’s comment would be more appropriate but that may not be how Turkish politicians see the matter.) That, again, would not be a real problem except for the fact that the European Union, for all its talk of a common foreign policy, has no real idea of how to deal with countries on its borders, except to view them as potential members.

What everyone is particularly afraid of is the possibility of Turkey turning away from the West and of its proud claim of being the only secularist Muslim country and becoming more Islamist. It is hard to tell whether this fear is real. Certainly, the army, the guardian of the Kemalist heritage is on the qui vive as far as the ruling, supposedly Islamist, AK Party is concerned.

On the other hand, apart from the vexed question of Abdul Gül’s wife’s headscarf, there has been little sign of Islamist changes, one reason for that being the outgoing President’s determined blocking of any attempts to introduce them.

Turkey is coming up to a parliamentary election in July 22 and its results are anxiously watched inside and outside the country. On top of that there is the question of the proposed constitutional reform, which would make the presidency electable directly rather than by the parliament, the existing system, which allowed the opposition to block Mr Gül’s attempt to become president.

The government reacted by announcing a decision to hold a referendum on the reform with the opposition appealing to the constitutional court to quash the reform. The court has decided that the idea to hold a referendum was constitutionally acceptable. If the AK Party wins the parliamentary election, a reasonable expectation, the referendum is likely to be in late autumn.

COMMENT THREAD

Gul_wife.02[i-Gul_wife.02]On Saturday, we are told by the Islamic Republic News Agency, the EU’s foreign policy supreme, Javier Solana, backed Abdullah Gül for the Turkish presidency. One might consider Solana’s and the EU’s backing as being the kiss of death for any politician.

Solana told Bild am Sonntag that in his opinion Gül had been an excellent Foreign Minister, having done so much to promote Turkey’s possible membership of the EU (what does that make the French Foreign Minister?) and will make an excellent President.

On Sunday came the news that Abdullah Gül, having not managed to get the required number of votes in the Turkish Parliament as the opposition boycotted the election, has withdrawn his candidacy. Two nil to the secularists, I’d say.

The EU cannot really complain (though, I am sure it will) as the entire process was within Turkey’s constitutional structure. The opposition has the right to boycott presidential elections and it is sensible for a candidate who stands no chance of getting the right number of votes to withdraw. We now await the parliamentary election that Prime Minister Erdogan has called.

Several questions arise. The most obvious one is why do Solana or the Enlargement Commissar, Olli Rehn, think that they have some kind of a right to interfere with internal Turkish matters.

The answer must be two-fold. In the first place there is the possibility, however remote, that Turkey will one day be a member of the European Union and this gives the present officials some rights in its politics. Or so they think. Curiously enough, the Turks do not appear to share this view.

The second point is that wretched common foreign policy, which has no particular aim or purpose. Therefore, in order to show that it does exist, after a fashion, constant statements have to be made and actions, as long as they have no results, have to be taken.

A more interesting question is why does the EU and, indeed, the great and the good across the world, take the Islamists’ side against the secularists’ in Turkey. After all, when it comes to Europe and the European countries, the EU is severely secularist as the Pope, for one, has pointed out.

Left wing newspapers, such as the Toronto Star, where I found this extremely funny article, would demand smelling salts if there were the slightest suggestion that legislation in Canada or the United States or Europe be proposed on the basis of religious views. Yet, in Turkey, where it matters desperately that the secularists stay somehow in power, they take the opposite side.

The answer from the EU’s point of view could be, as my colleague has suggested, that an Islamist Turkey will no longer be a problem in the sense that she could not possibly be part of the European Union. In the process, they lose sight of the fact that an Islamist Turkey would be a problem in many other ways and of another dismal fact – if the Turks are becoming more Islamists, it is at least partially because of the EU’s shenanigans.

Then there is the question of what it is Erdogan playing at. A man, who seems to have had a sure political touch until now, appears to have miscalculated rather badly over the question of presidential elections. Could he have wanted to provoke the secularists in order to control the stronger Islamists in his own party? Might he have done a deal of some kind with the army? Is he trying to pressurize the EU? Could he be hoping for a bigger majority in the parliamentary elections than he would have got if they had come in a few months’ time as scheduled?

Turning away from all this discussion, let us look at Abdullah Gül’s wife and her headwear. One of the problems about Gül is that his wife wears a headscarf and it is part of Turkey’s secular settlement that women are not allowed to wear them in public offices, which clearly includes the presidential palace.

Anyone who thinks this is a minor matter does not understand the importance of certain symbols. The clothes people and, especially, women wear in Islamic countries make a crucial point about those countries.

Hayrounisa Gül, in the picture above, wears a silk scarf and a very expensive looking leather coat. One wonders what the Mullahs of Iran and their morality police would have made of it.

COMMENT THREAD

Turkey+rally.01[i-Turkey+rally.01]Events in Turkey are becoming extremely interesting with the EU, as usual, flapping on the sidelines. It was always clear to anyone who managed to think about it for two consecutive minutes – which means not the EU foreign policy makers – that Turkey needs to be treated quite carefully. Otherwise, we may find ourselves facing the choice of either an Islamist government or a military dictatorship. Well, that time may have come.

This week-end saw another enormous demonstration in Istanbul of opponents of political Islam. According to the police there were well over a million people there.

A couple of weeks ago there was a smaller demonstration of only 300,000 also in favour of retaining Turkey’s prized secular status. At the time there were dark mutterings of the demonstration having been organized by the army and possibly it was not entirely untrue. Developments this week-end show that the support for secularism is more widespread than just in and around the military.

The immediate cause of this excitement is the forthcoming presidential elections and we have written about this before. Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan of the Islamist AK Party was thought to have been eyeing the presidency for himself but was put off by the first demonstration. Instead he promoted the present Foreign Minister, Abdullah Gül, a close ally and also an Islamist. One of the complaints against Erdogan and his decision was that he did not consult the opposition parties as is customary over the question of presidential candidates, relying, one assumes on his majority in parliament to get his man in.

The opposition Republican People's Party has presented the Constitutional Court with a petition to suspend the presidential election, claiming that Erdogan had acted unconstitutionally and that putting someone like Gül into the presidential palace would undermine the secularist state of Turkey.

Prime Minister Erdogan, on the other hand, has claimed that far from introducing political Islamism, his government has been very pro-Western and reformist. Though, as he did not add, this may well have been because of the barely hidden threat by the army to overthrow any government that pushes Turkey towards an Islamic state and because of a secularist President who managed to control or overrule many of the proposals.

Turkey+rally.03[i-Turkey+rally.03]There have been various attempts to criminalize adultery, restrict the sale of alcohol and lift the ban on the wearing of headscarves in government offices. The fear is that with an Islamist President and an Islamist Prime Minister these attempts will be successful.

In fact, Abdullah Gül is finding it more difficult to achieve the presidency than it had been expected. In the first round he failed to win the necessary number of votes and, it is expected, that he will not get in till the third round, due to take place (Constitutional Court permitting) on May 9.

The army, which considers itself to be the guardian of Atatürk’s settlement, has quite openly threatened to deal with the situation if the government moved towards political Islamic structures and this has caused an immediate flap among the great and the good in Europe.

One effect of the crisis was almost predictable:

The turmoil unsettled traders in Istanbul, where the benchmark index, the IMKB-100, was down 4.01 percent at 44,984.45 points by closing, after opening down 7.99 percent. Turkey's currency, the lira, slid against foreign currencies and was trading at 1.36 against the U.S. dollar, compared to Friday's close of 1.33.

Turkey, a candidate for European Union membership, has been steadily recovering from a financial crisis in 2001, curbing inflation and pushing ahead with banking reform and other initiatives backed by the International Monetary Fund. The country has huge foreign debt but is attractive to foreign investors.

Analysts said the markets will likely recover if the government defuses tension by agreeing to early elections for Parliament, a move that could appease critics and clear the way for more vigorous implementation of economic reforms once a new government is in place. But they warned that sustained political uncertainty would take its toll.

The Turkish press, as Deutsche Welle reports, is not taking sides but calling on both the government and the military to sort the problems out for the country’s sake. The point several journalists make is that, while the military may be there to protect the secular structure, the idea that it should do so by overruling a democratically elected government (as it has done on several occasions in recent years) is not all that appealing either.

The Turkish press on Sunday was unanimous in calling on the government and the army to resolve their differences democratically and said early elections were the only way to prevent the country from plunging into chaos.

"Turkey either giving up on secularism or suspending democracy are two doomsday scenarios impossible to choose between," the popular daily Vatan said.

The liberal daily Milliyet said the army's warning had "cast a shadow on the credibility and respectability of civilian institutions."

"The latest developments show that the current term of parliament has reached the end of its natural life. Elections should be held at once," it added.

Turkey+rally.02[i-Turkey+rally.02]Prime Minister Erdogan has addressed the nation, appealing for unity and calm. However, it seems that, although the address was broadcast today, it was actually recorded on Saturday, that is, before the mass demonstration. Earlier the government’s spokesman, Çemil Çiçek, said this:

It is inconceivable in a democratic state based on the rule of law for the General Staff, which is under the orders of the prime minister, to speak out against the government. The primary duty in protecting the basic tenets of the state falls on the government. The Chief of the General Staff is answerable to the Prime Minister.

It is a difficult situation to understand and the EU having not helped matters by creating endless difficulties over negotiations for Turkey’s membership of the EU (while not making it clear that this is an impossible idea, either) and having behaved with less than total honesty in Cyprus, is now making grandiloquent statements.

Both the European Union and the Council of Europe have rushed in to demand that the army stay out of Turkish politics, an impossible notion, given modern Turkey’s history. Terry Davies, the Council of Europe’s Secretary General said:

I am very anxious about this statement from the Turkish military. It sounds like an explicit attempt by the armed forces to influence the outcome of the presidential election.

Then again, these days the Council of Europe has members like Azerbaijan and the Russian Federation, so its attachment to human rights may not be as strong as it used to be.

For the European Union Ollie Rehn, the Enlargement Commissar opined:

It is important that the military leaves the remit of democracy to the democratically elected government. This is a test case if the Turkish armed forces respect democratic secularism and the democratic arrangement of civil-military relations.

He is quite wrong. The test case will come if Turkey, the only more or less democratic secular Muslim state is taken over by political Islamism. What will all the great and the good say then? The European Union, one assumes, will heave a sigh of relief. All negotiations with Tukey can be abandoned. The Council of Europe will bleat on. But a reliable Western ally will disappear.

Of course, the crisis may pass and Erdogan may stay on a secularist path, not least because he still has some hope that the EU will open its doors to Turkey. The most likely reason for that, however, will be the threat expressed by the army and a large part of the populace.

COMMENT THREAD

Abdullah+Gul[i-Abdullah+Gul]We did not write about the horrific news from Turkey last week of the three Christians tortured and murdered not because we do not think it was important but because it was adequately (if sometimes lamely) discussed in the media and there was nothing we could add.

We do not think it is likely that the criminals were "ultra-nationalists" and, judging by those arrested, neither does the Turkish police, though it seems to have been the line taken by some journalists in Britain. One cannot judge a country by appalling crimes of this kind but only by the way they are dealt with. So we wait and see.

Meanwhile, the presidential elections are coming up there, as well, though the President is not elected directly but by the Parliament. There was some worry that the Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan would run for President, a largely ceremonial position though with some power to prevent legislation. The outgoing President, Ahmet Necdet Sezer, has vetoed a record number of bills and appointments to protect Turkey's cherished (well, by some) secular order.

Mr Erdogan's ruling Justice and Development Party (AK) is more Islamist and there has been some worry, especially in the army that sees itself as the guardian of the secular state as created by Kemal Atatürk, that he would run for President. Secularists, including those who came out to demonstrate earlier this month against Erdogan, see him as entirely unsuitable for the position.

As Der Spiegel reports Mr Erdogan has tried to defuse the tension by announcing that the party's nominee (and, given the parliamentary majority, a certainty for the postion) will be the current Foreign Minister, Abdullah Gül (seen with Secretary of State Rice in an official State Department picture above).

The solution is not totally satisfactory from the secularists' point of view as Mr Gül's views are seen as similar to Mr Erdogan's.

Like Erdogan's wife, Gül's wife Hayrunisa wears a headscarf and secularists are opposed to the idea of Islamic attire in the presidential palace. Head scarves have been banned in public offices and on university campuses since Atatürk's Western-style reforms in the 1930s.

"His mind-set is no different than Erdogan's," Mustafa Ozyurek, deputy chair of the main opposition party, Republican People's Party, told the AP. "There is no evidence that he is sincerely loyal at heart to the secular republic and principles of Atatürk."

To be fair, Mr Erdogan's government did not turn out to be as strongly Islamist as was feared but that may have been because of control exercised by the President, something that will disappear now. Meanwhile, the army is watching keenly for any signs of backsliding from the Kemalian settlement.

COMMENT THREAD

Eugene+of+Savoy[i-Eugene+of+Savoy]It is entirely possible that some readers will show their displeasure at the fact that I have posted a picture of Eugene of Savoy at the start of a piece about Turkey, he being the general who defeated the Ottomans once or twice. This statue celebrates the Battle of Zenta of 1697 and stands above the Danube, in front of Buda castle. As he looks out, Prince Eugene commands a very fine view (though not as fine as the views in Yorkshire).

It was a short piece on American Thinker that led me to think of Prince Eugene. It seems that Turkish Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul was irritated by a farewell present to retiring (and not a moment too soon) President Chirac from Chancellor Merkel. It seems the antique beer mug was decorated by illustrations from a French victory over the Ottomans.

Thomas Lifson is rightly disdainful about the Turkish huffing and puffing:

Gull [sic] should understand that we are free to celebrate our victories. Americans celebrate our Revolutionary War from Britain with nary a peep from our Brit cousins. The French celebrate their victory at Austerlitz with a railway station, and Germany doesn't object. I have to wonder if Turkey might not celebrate a victory or two.

Very true, I thought, seething again at the thought of an inscription I read to a picture in the Royal Academy's "Turks" exhibition about the "glorious Szigetvár campaign" in Hungary in the sixteenth century. Glorious? It was a national tragedy, lightened merely by the heroism of the defenders, all but a handful of whom were killed.

And right again about Brits not minding too much about the Revolutionary War, not even when seriously misleading films such as "The Patriot" are produced. Though I cannot help thinking that German equanimity about the Battle of Austerlitz may have something to do with the fact that they were not much involved, it being the "Battle of the Three Emperors": Napoleon, Francis I of Austria (then still the Holy Roman Emperor Francis II) and Alexander I of Russia.

What rather puzzled me was the French victory over the Ottomans. I looked up the history of the Ottoman Empire in the eighteenth century and found several Russo-Turkish wars, which went this way and that (mostly that) and several defeats of the Ottomans by the Austrians under Prince Eugene of Savoy (hence the picture). Of course, some of the defeats were reversed and had to be repeated but, on the whole, events went this way.

Which French victory? Right at the bottom of the list, dear reader, is something I ought to have remembered (mea culpa): 1798 Battle of the Pyramids. Quite so, though, as it was swiftly followed by the Battle of Aboukir and the Siege of Acre, it may not be something the French care to dwell on too much, despite Napoleon's stirring words to his soldiers:

Soldiers, from the heights of these pyramids, forty centuries look down on us.

Still, the Germans could have produced a beer mug with l'empereur making that speech or fighting the mameluk army.

Looking up the original story I found, sadly, that it was all a storm in a tea-cup or beer mug.

The German government said Wednesday the commotion had sprung from a misunderstanding: The mug, manufactured around 1710 in Germany, was adorned with flower ornaments, not a pictorial depiction of a historic war victory.

I wonder which translator was responsible for that little effort and whether he or she is in the Bosphorus yet.

Meanwhile, beer mugs aside, something is stirring on the EU-Turkish front. The negotiations have been resumed with the opening of another chapter, number 20, to be precise, on enterprise and industrial policies, "after the German presidency held emergency talks between Spain, France and the European Commission (EC) on Monday". In fact, this is only the second chapter that has been opened in the negotiations with Turkey, so the ten year long timetable remains over-optimistic.

The question of whether Turkey could or should ever become part of the European Union is very wide, indeed, and starts with a very basic query for the EU: exactly how far does it intend to expand and what is the purpose of that expansion.

On other postings I have argued that the EU is a little like an amoeba (though less useful) in that it can exist only if it enlarges itself. If it is not negotiating the entry of new members it has to deal with all the internal contradictions of its structure as it exists. That would be an intolerable burden for the politicians and theoreticians of integration.

Aydın Dumanoğlu, the co-chairman of the Turkey-EU Joint Parliamentary Commission, expressed the view that the EU and Turkey needed each other, as "the EU needs Turkey as a global actor and Turkey needs the EU as a vision".

It is nice to hear somebody describing the EU as a vision after all these years. It is, however, a vision that has been somewhat tarnished, not least in the eyes of the Turkish people who see a great deal of hostility to themselves (and if their foreign minister goes around making dumb comments, they can expect no other) and in the eyes of the Turkish military, a very important participant, who do not seem to like the idea of having to make choices between European defence strategies and the American alliance.

However, there is one very good reason why the EU needs Turkey. With the Turks inside the tent the European army may well become a reality at last.

COMMENT THREAD

AIR+-+JSF+098[i-AIR+-+JSF+098]
In Washington yesterday, Turkey signed on for the next phase of the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF), pledging $175 million toward the aircraft's production and promising to buy 100 of the conventional-take-off-and-landing version (F-35A) of the aircraft, worth about $10 billion.

This follows the decision in October last when Turkey's Air Force decided to go for the Lightning II, dashing any hopes of the "colleagues" that the Eurofighter might be chosen.

Back in October though, only the Air Force, as the user, had made the decision - which had to be ratified by the government. It now has been. In the Pentagon yesterday US deputy defense secretary Gordon England met with Turkey's national defense minister Mehmet Vecdi Gonul and undersecretary for defense industries Murad Bayar, where they signed a memorandum of understanding, cementing the deal.

Of course, this is much, much more than an aircraft deal, as indicated by England's remarks prior to the signing. He said he had spent several years cultivating US relations with Turkey and called the Turkish officials present "dear, close friends," adding, "Our country is privileged to have such a strong and dynamic ally in Turkey … Together our two nations are standing together in the name of freedom."

This continued Turkish participation, says the US Department of Defense, reinforces the longstanding and close relationship between the US and Turkish Air Forces, "providing a solid foundation for future air operations with other allied and friendly nations in a joint and coalition environment."

But it also signals, if not a cooling in the relationship between Turkey and the EU, then certainly the reluctance to get too far into bed with the Europeans, especially in such a vital area as defence. The message will undoubtedly be received and understood in Brussels, both in the EU commission headquarters and in Nato.

COMMENT THREAD

POL+-+Merkel+079[i-POL+-+Merkel+079]It's back again – that "God" question. Angela Merkel, we are told, has renewed criticism that the EU constitution does not explicitly refer to Europe's Christian roots, with a reference to God or Christianity.

This is according to an interview today, published in the German news weekly Focus. She talks with German cardinal Karl Lehmann, telling him that she "…would have liked to have seen a clearer declaration on the Christian roots (of Europe) … No one doubts that they significantly shape our life, our society."

You really do have to admire the tenacity of these people – if nothing else. Back in early 2004 when this blog was but a mere pup, God and the constitution was on the agenda then.

At the time, we though that this was primarily a ploy to exclude Turkey from the EU, or make it feel unwelcome – in the hope that this Muslim country would be dissuaded from joining.

The probably remains the case today, although Merkel has the sense to dress it up as an expression for her concern for the survival of Christianity. "I wonder, can we maintain the formative aspects of Christianity for day-to-day politics if the political sphere does not stand by them?" she ruminates.

Politics and religion, of course, is a dangerous mix but, when an idea is floated in the European Union, it does seen that you simply cannot say no. Like a recalcitrant child refusing to eat its breakfast being re-presented with the same meal again and again, the people of Europe, it seems, are to have God thrust into their lives – and a Christian God at that - whether they like it or not.

COMMENT THREAD

Turkey+EU[i-Turkey+EU]As we approach the entry of Romania and Bulgaria into the European Union (boy, is that going to be fun!), some people are turning their attention to Turkey. As it happens, Turkey's possible entry has been pushed even further into the future with the Commission part-freezing the negotiations, allegedly because of Turkey's refusal to deal with the question of Cyprus but, really, because the EU is getting cold feet about that country.

Though, as we have said before, if the EU wants its own army, it has to have Turkey in. Who else has enough well-trained, well-equipped soldiers? Poland and Turkey can form the backbone of the European defence force. There's a wonderful historic irony for you.

Yesterday evening I was in 18 Doughty Street, waiting for my turn. I was about to take part in a discussion about counterfactual history with several other contributors to "Prime Minister Portillo and Other Things that Never Happened" and "President Gore and Other Things that Never Happened". Well, since you ask, the two essays I had written were: "What if Lenin's train had never reached Petrograd" and "What if the Czechoslovak army had fought in 1938".

While waiting for our programme I listened to the discussion before it, mostly about newspaper stories, that involved the presenter and two others: Russell Walters of the Democracy Movement and Greg Clark MP (he of the Polly Toynbee idea).

What intrigued me was the efforts made by both discusants to demonstrate that taking in Turkey would be a good idea because it would prevent any further integration and would make the EU shallower. To be fair to the presenter, he did remind them of the same comments and promises being made before the East European countries came in and none of that had materialized. In fact, it is the East Europeans who have to adjust their hitherto reasonably successful economies to our own high-tax, high-regulation ones. And, as some of us predicted at the time, those adjustments are playing havoc with the economies there.

In fact, what we said at the time was that each enlargement was accompanied by greater integration as it was impossible to run ever more and ever more diverse member states together without centralizing more powers. The big one into Eastern Europe was used for huge steps forward with integration in the Treaties of Amsterdam and Nice and even bigger ones attempted with the Constitution for Europe.

All of this seems to have passed by a number of the commentators, who are known as eurosceptics. The truth is that it is not enough to be called a eurosceptic. One also has to have some knowledge on the subject.

So, next time somebody says that taking in more countries, particularly Turkey would result in a shallower European Union, here are a few questions to ask;

Does this mean that the leaders will call another IGC and change the treaties to restore a number of the existing EU competences to the member states? In particular, will they rescind the Social Chapter, a subject apparently dear to the Boy King's heart?

Does this mean that there will be a change to the treaties (through an IGC, which is the only way to do it) and vetoes will be reintroduced in a number of areas that are now legislated on according to qualified majority voting?

Does this mean that the ECJ decision in the Van Gend & Loos case of February 1963, which determined that European legislation is superior to national, something that has been written into the European Communities Act 1972?

Will there be a change to the treaties (through an IGC etc etc) and the Commission's role as the sole initiator of legislation within Pillar I will be changed?

I have an odd suspicion that the answer to all those questions will be firstly a blank stare, secondly a number of throat clearances and stammered nothings and, thirdly, a reluctant no. Well, in that case, how is the European Union going to become shallower?

COMMENT THREAD

Zap%20Junck[i-Zap%20Junck]Something we didn't pick up from the general media is a report on an English language Spanish site which headlines a piece: "EU summit on the European Constitution set for Madrid in January".

We are told that, at the "European Summit" (i.e., Council) on Friday, Spain and Luxembourg announced a joint initiative to try to recover the idea of a European Constitution. The prime ministers announced a new EU summit between the 18 countries which have already ratified the document, to be held in Madrid on 26 January.

These were Spanish prime minister, José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero and the failure of Luxembourg, Jean-Claude Juncker, the man whose one aim in life is to see his bébé come out of intensive care.

How instructive it is, though, that Blair, immediately following the European Council, jetted off to Egypt – with a brief stop-over in Turkey - in a bid to resolve the growing Mid-East crisis. He went not as a plenipotentiary of the EU, nor as one of an EU "troika" or whatever other grouping they tend to go for. He went as Tony Blair, prime minister of the United Kingdom.

erdogan-blair_b[i-erdogan-blair_b]Furthermore, how interesting it is was, while in Turkey, Blair met his counterpart, Recep Tayyip Erdogan and talked not of Turkey's (failing) bid to enter the EU but of how to revive peace negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians (not that that is possible if the latter are determined to rip themselves apart in a civil war).

Thus do the "little Europeans" condemn themselves. With their obsessive navel-gazing, they are not only boring us all to death but highlighting the pathetic vacuity of their agenda and their irrelevance as world players.

COMMENT THREAD

link[i-link]The fate of the Joint Strike Fighter – or F-35 Lightning II as we must learn to call it – has hugely entertained us on this site, with the will they won't they drama of whether the Brits will actually buy it and the parallel saga of the second engine.

Although things have gone somewhat silent and there are still serious funding issues, the UK still seems to be in the game, even though we have yet to hear precisely what has happened to the carrier project.

But there always was going to be a time when the players had to get serious. That time has arrived: the participants in the multi-national project have to commit to the production and support phase.

Leading the way is the Netherlands which on Tuesday became the first of the partner nations to make that commitment. The other F-35 partner nations - the United Kingdom, Italy, Turkey, Canada, Australia, Denmark and Norway - are expected to sign up by the end of December.

Then the music is going to have to stop and the partners are going to have to put up or shut up. For Gordon Brown, that means a serious spending commitment – getting on for £15 billion, including the carriers. I suspect that there is more than a little heart-searching going on in the Treasury. Meanwhile, DID has a good backgrounder on the Dutch decision.

COMMENT THREAD